Nevertheless, I don't think he needs to apologize for being a little hot under the collar.

And here is where the whole thing comes to splinters:

What you think he needs to do is 100% irrelevant to the discussion.

It's my content. It's my choice. It's my option to let him say his peace or shut him the hell up.

If you want to hear what he has to say, you are 100% within your rights to post "Everyone muted by kleinbl00 - here's your chance to expound on what a douchebag he is" and shout out everybody you want to hear from just to make sure they get the message. In response, I'm 100% in my rights to mute you as well.

And then you can all form your own insular, self-reinforcing kleinbl00-hating community and there's fuckall I can do about it.

I don't see his discussion as being inherently "dishonest,"

The discussion is abut the value and importance of apology and community building and his viewpoint is that apologies are only ever called for if you're guilty of a crime. I went three rounds with him to discuss that point and the answer was

"This is why I stopped trying to have a conversation with you. "

So. One of us is trying to see the other's viewpoint. The other is stirring up shit. And since it's my post, I'm the one that gets to use the STFU button. He didn't just make "flippant remarks" he rejected any opportunity for conversation not once, not twice, but three times.

If I had a blog, I wouldn't have to put up with that. And since Hubski is built around following people, not subjects, that option is mine here, too.